Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9175559" data-attributes="member: 18">I think there's truth in both of these, honestly.[USER=52905]@darjr[/USER] is right about there being a lot of huge Kickstarters, but I will say that there's a big difference between being an officially endorsed and integrated setting that might appear in future WotC products, and a 3PP setting. Eberron has had more real influence on D&amp;D than any number of 3PP settings, I'd say.And re: the settings that do get made via KS and the like - I think they're often ones recent WotC wouldn't even consider, for various reasons, but often because they're either in competition with existing WotC settings, or because they're not on-brand and safe enough for WotC (even though many are pretty safe!).And I think [USER=6807152]@Scribe[/USER] is right that certainly the WotC of say, two years ago, if they did a setting contest, would absolutely go for a very safe and very unchallenging setting, and quite likely one presenting as &quot;Hopepunk&quot;, of the specific kind which doesn't really have any punk - i.e. there's nothing being rebelled against, it's just a jolly setting where, inexplicably, the main mode of play remains going out with weapons and spells and slaughtering sentient beings and taking their stuff.I do think you could do something interesting with a hopeful setting - a fantasy version of Star Trek (but on a single world), with a good guy &quot;Federation&quot; equivalent surrounded by antagonists - not unakin to Blue Rose's default setting (which long predates &quot;Hopepunk&quot;), but I don't think the recent WotC is the company to do that.I say recent, because who knows where WotC will go in the future? But I kind of think until WotC are willing to take a few more risks and to move away from seemingly wanting everything to be as safe as possible, any setting contest would be rather counterproductive.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 9175559, member: 18"] I think there's truth in both of these, honestly. [USER=52905]@darjr[/USER] is right about there being a lot of huge Kickstarters, but I will say that there's a big difference between being an officially endorsed and integrated setting that might appear in future WotC products, and a 3PP setting. Eberron has had more real influence on D&D than any number of 3PP settings, I'd say. And re: the settings that do get made via KS and the like - I think they're often ones recent WotC wouldn't even consider, for various reasons, but often because they're either in competition with existing WotC settings, or because they're not on-brand and safe enough for WotC (even though many are pretty safe!). And I think [USER=6807152]@Scribe[/USER] is right that certainly the WotC of say, two years ago, if they did a setting contest, would absolutely go for a very safe and very unchallenging setting, and quite likely one presenting as "Hopepunk", of the specific kind which doesn't really have any punk - i.e. there's nothing being rebelled against, it's just a jolly setting where, [I]inexplicably[/I], the main mode of play remains going out with weapons and spells and slaughtering sentient beings and taking their stuff. I do think you could do something interesting with a hopeful setting - a fantasy version of Star Trek (but on a single world), with a good guy "Federation" equivalent surrounded by antagonists - not unakin to Blue Rose's default setting (which long predates "Hopepunk"), but I don't think the recent WotC is the company to do that. I say recent, because who knows where WotC will go in the future? But I kind of think until WotC are willing to take a few more risks and to move away from seemingly wanting everything to be as safe as possible, any setting contest would be rather counterproductive. [/QUOTE]

Verification